Behind the scenes of Raja Petra’s TV3 interview
In his SD of June 18, 2008, Raja Petra swore he had been “reliably informed that between about 10pm on 19th October 2006 and early hours of the following day, the night Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered, three (3) other people were also present at the scene of the crime”.
Written by Koon Yew Yin, CPI
At the PKR 11th anniversary dinner on Tuesday (April 19) in Ipoh, party vice president Chua Jui Meng alleged that Raja Petra Kamarudin had been bought. Chua said that money could do wonders as indicated by the recent Sarawak election result.
Why would the fugitive blogger and Malaysia Today editor just before the election, in the TV3 interview, cast doubts on his own sensational statutory declaration?
In his SD of June 18, 2008, Raja Petra swore he had been “reliably informed that between about 10pm on 19th October 2006 and early hours of the following day, the night Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered, three (3) other people were also present at the scene of the crime”.
In an e-mail interview with Malaysia Insider on April 15, Raja Petra insisted that he is not a turncoat. He said that he will continue to support the opposition – the Pakatan Rakyat.
Immediately following the TV3 interview of Raja Petra, the Prime Minister Najib Razak claimed that he is thankful that the truth has finally emerged and he considered the matter closed.
Is the matter really closed?
Many Malaysians, including myself, consider the matter as far from being closed because all the earlier unanswered questions are still awaiting responses, especially from the PM himself.
These questions are as follows:
1. What were the motives of the two police officers convicted of killing Altantuya as they appear to have no earlier connection or previous knowledge of her?
2. How did they obtain the C4 explosives and who approved the release of this strictly restricted materiel to them?
3. The third accused Abdul Razak Baginda – who was acquitted of the charge against him – is a political analyst with known ties to Najib. A transcript had surfaced of alleged text messages between them. What did the sms exchanges imply?
4. Why was DSP Musa Safri never investigated when he gave orders to his officer Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri to help Razak Baginda? Azilah had testified in court that Musa told him Razak had a problem because someone threatened him and he [Azilah] was to lend assistance to Razak.
5. Why was Altantuya’s record of entry missing from the immigration records? Have the immigration officers responsible provided a credible explanation as to how Altantuya’s entry details seemingly disappeared?
6. Why has the immigration department not carried out an internal inquiry, and the other higher authorities carried out an independent inquiry, into this serious breach or if they did, the report not made public?
7. Why were the three affidavits and video interview of P. Balasubramaniam, who was engaged by Abdul Razak Baginda as private investigator and who has since vanished, not investigated?
The above questions have been there right since the start of the case and they will continue to be there for posterity until the truth of the grisly murder finally emerges.
And until these damaging questions are fully investigated by a fair and independent police and judiciary, the cloud hanging over the Prime Minister’s head because of the Altantuya case will not be dispelled.
As this matter is so sensational and the whole world is interested, the government must set up a royal commission to investigate it thoroughly so that all quarters under a cloud can be vindicated, and Malaysia’s image as well as public confidence restored.
